67,424
edits
Shambala108 (talk | contribs) m (Reverted edits by 82.132.236.138 (talk) to last version by Scrooge MacDuck) |
|||
(9 intermediate revisions by 5 users not shown) | |||
Line 28: | Line 28: | ||
== Requested Clarifications and Q&A == | == Requested Clarifications and Q&A == | ||
In [[Thread:260549#45|your reply]] to my note on your talk page, you asked several questions and identified several points that you found unclear. I cannot and will not speak for Revan, Arcbeatle, or the Cwej anthology editors, so I am unable to fully answer all of your questions. Nonetheless, they were addressed to me, so I will give them my best shot. By doing this, I hope to clarify your points of confusion and move toward de-escalation of this disagreement. | In [[Thread:260549#45|your reply]] to my note on your talk page, you asked several questions and identified several points that you found unclear. I cannot and will not speak for Revan, Arcbeatle, or the Cwej anthology editors, so I am unable to fully answer all of your questions. Nonetheless, they were addressed to me, so I will give them my best shot. By doing this, I hope to clarify your points of confusion and move toward de-escalation of this disagreement. | ||
Line 93: | Line 92: | ||
Best regards! – [[User:NateBumber|<span title="User:NateBumber">N8</span>]] ([[User_talk:NateBumber|<span title="Leave me a note">☎</span>]]/[[Special:Contributions/NateBumber|<span title="Spy on my edits">👁️</span>]]) 20:50, January 11, 2020 (UTC) | Best regards! – [[User:NateBumber|<span title="User:NateBumber">N8</span>]] ([[User_talk:NateBumber|<span title="Leave me a note">☎</span>]]/[[Special:Contributions/NateBumber|<span title="Spy on my edits">👁️</span>]]) 20:50, January 11, 2020 (UTC) | ||
: Amorkuz, cheers for the lengthy talk page message. Unfortunately, I presently cannot give you the point-by-point response you deserve; school is ''still'' my main creative outlet, and it has only become more demanding as it has progressed. For the same reason, the "new Doctor Who spinoff" I once mentioned is quite unlikely to ever materialize, and I also cannot undertake the (quite substantial) edits you requested. As you [[User talk:NateBumber/Archive 2#Bias|recently reminded me]], all editors must be considerate of each others' unique schedules and habits, so -- just as I understand your inability or unwillingness to answer any of the six questions I asked you in the above message, to which you were nominally replying -- I appreciate your understanding that this is not me "showing that [I] prefer to side with a publisher rather than with our wiki rules", but merely me showing that I'm busy. That said, there are a few specific claims you made that I can briefly reply to. | |||
: First, that I ignored policy by creating ''[[The Rise and Fall of Señor 105 (novel)|The Rise and Fall of Señor 105]]''. You're quite right that I'm well aware that [[Thread:117545]] says the ''Señor 105'' series is invalid. But the ''Señor 105'' series ended in 2014, whereas this book is part of the [[Obverse Sextet]] series, which features [[Señor 105]] alongside [[Faction Paradox]], [[Iris Wildthyme]], the [[Manleigh Halt Irregulars]], etc. Meaning ''The Rise and Fall'' is more along the lines of ''[[Elementary, My Dear Sheila (short story)|Elementary, My Dear Sheila]]'' than ''The Gulf''. In hindsight, I should have started a thread about it, but it seemed to me a straightforward application of the precedent set by ''[[The Worlds of Big Finish (audio anthology)|The Worlds of Big Finish]]''. Mea culpa. In any case, I feel as if your points would probably have been better placed on [[Talk:The Rise and Fall of Señor 105 (novel)|the book's talk page]], where other users can also see and comment on them. | |||
: Second, that ''[[The Book of the War (novel)|The Book of the War]]'' is a non-narrative source. I see that [[User:Scrooge MacDuck]] has already begun countering this suggestion, and I believe it was he whom you once warned, | |||
{{quote|Please refrain from commenting on material you haven't read. |[[User:Amorkuz]]|Talk:The Doctor: His Lives and Times}} | |||
: In the same spirit, I invite you to read ''The Book of the War'' before calling for its invalidity. [[Shift (Alien Bodies)|You might be surprised with what you find.]] In any case, I again feel as if your points would probably have been better placed elsewhere, whether [[Talk:The Book of the War (novel)|the book's talk page]] or an "exclusion debate" thread, as evidenced by the fact that there are now other users litigating ''The Book of the War''{{'}}s validity on your talk page! | |||
: Third, that my contributions to ''[[The Book of the Enemy (anthology)|The Book of the Enemy]]'' and ''[[The Book of the Peace (anthology)|The Book of the Peace]]'' are due to some sort of (cleverly-named) "Credit for Edit" conspiracy. The only evidence for this is my hiring by [[Obverse Books]], from which you conclude | |||
{{quote|The only plausible explanation for the preferential treatment is that it was a reward for your FP advocacy here on the wiki.|[[User:Amorkuz]]}} | |||
: I contest the notion that this is "the only plausible explanation". There are some other pieces of information which you didn't mention, and they point toward an alternative explanation: | |||
:* [[Thread:260549#56|As you know]], I (used to) maintain a Faction Paradox fan blog on Tumblr. | |||
:* [[Jacob Black]], another new writer in ''The Book of the Enemy'', also maintains a Faction Paradox fan blog on Tumblr. | |||
:* [[Simon Bucher-Jones]], editor of ''The Book of the Enemy'', happens to ''also'' maintain a blog on Tumblr. | |||
:* Simon Bucher-Jones invited both Jacob and I to contribute to ''The Book of the Enemy'' at the same time, in fall 2017, via Tumblr DM. (In a conversation that was, I imagine, actually quite similar to Russell T Davies inviting J.K. Rowling to contribute to ''Who''. I must admit, your comment about that confuses me. It wasn't an anthology where you could submit a story; how else could a writer join the project, other than being asked?) | |||
: As you've likely guessed, the alternative explanation I'm pointing to is that Simon Bucher-Jones poached talent from Tumblr, not the wiki. In fact, this explanation has an advantage over yours: not only is it plausible, it also doesn't assume bad faith -- and on top of that, it's '''true'''. If only you had asked me to explain before embarking on this speculation, I could have preemptively allayed your concerns about this "scheme"! | |||
: (And, just to set the record straight, the quote you listed does not at all indicate that I had "no writing credentials" before being asked to write for Obverse: rather, I had already contributed several stories to the ''Shit Trips'' fan anthology series -- as noted on [[Nate Bumber|my Wiki author page]] -- and organized a charity anthology -- before, once again, my irl commitments meant I had to step away.) | |||
: Beyond these specific claims, I must admit that I fail to see the relevance of many of your points. | |||
:* As far as I can recall, I've never cited [[T:SPOIL]] or [[T:FORUM]] against you; if you disagree with how they were used in [[Thread:260549]], you should probably take it up with those users, not me. | |||
:* I'm sorry to hear that you find [[Help:Assume good faith]] so frustrating, but I'm glad we agree that I was not "phishing" by inviting you on a podcast. Previous [https://whocaresdw.wordpress.com/ ''Who Cares''] guests have used voice filters and temporary, anonymous Discord accounts to record episodes, so had you asked, I would have been able to sincerely ensure you that no personal information would have been solicited, even if you had accepted. | |||
:* Lastly, I'm also sorry to hear that narrative subversion upsets you so; I felt what I can only imagine is a similar frustration when ''[[The Day of the Doctor (TV story)|The Day of the Doctor]]'' subverted [[Russell T Davies]]' intentions for the [[Last Great Time War]], so I can empathize. If you wish to relitigate [[Thread:206566]] based on this new Rule 4 evidence, I invite you to do so. | |||
: I could go on at great length defending [[T:FAITH]], ''[[The Rise and Fall of Señor 105 (novel)|The Rise and Fall of Señor 105]]'', ''[[The Book of the War (novel)|The Book of the War]]'', and the irrelevance of series aesthetics to validity; there are also many more points I could dispute, such as the timeline of edits on that artist's Tumblr post. But as I've already mentioned, I'm sorry that I simply don't have the time. (I also don't want to take up the rather silly position of defending wiki policy to an admin!) | |||
: That said, I noticed that many of your individual points seem to be better suited for other talk pages or their own Panopticon threads, and while your subject line ("It would have been impolite not to respond") contextualizes them as a reply to my previous message to you, there is only -- at best -- one paragraph that even tangentially connects with anything I asked you. Rather, the connecting theme I see between your points is that they're all related to me, tangentially or otherwise, from questioning my honesty about conflicts of interest to critiquing edits I made three years ago. As a reminder, policy states: | |||
{{quote|Specific examples of personal attacks include but are not limited to: | |||
* Using someone's affiliations as a means of dismissing or discrediting their views — regardless of whether said affiliations are mainstream or extreme. | |||
* Accusatory comments towards editors or people associated with the production of ''Doctor Who'' that can be considered personal attacks if said repeatedly, in bad faith, or with sufficient venom. | |||
Never suggest a view is invalid simply because of who its proponent is.|[[Tardis:No personal attacks]]|T:NPA}} | |||
: In any case, I'll forgo this particular chance to ask you any more questions. Thanks for reading! – [[User:NateBumber|<span title="User:NateBumber">N8</span>]] ([[User_talk:NateBumber|<span title="Leave me a note">☎</span>]]/[[Special:Contributions/NateBumber|<span title="Spy on my edits">👁️</span>]]) 19:01, January 21, 2020 (UTC) | |||
== Contextual quotes in response to claims being made in Thread:260549 == | == Contextual quotes in response to claims being made in Thread:260549 == | ||
Line 216: | Line 250: | ||
Nothing's stopping you from creating an inclusion debate for ''The Book of the War'' (or, rather, an ''ex''clusion debate; there are [[Thread:133189|precedents]], you might recall), but I don't see how the situation is anywhere near one-sided enough for you to demand it be invalidated right there and then based on your own personal research and judgement. --[[User:Scrooge MacDuck|Scrooge MacDuck]] [[User talk:Scrooge MacDuck|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 11:41, January 19, 2020 (UTC) | Nothing's stopping you from creating an inclusion debate for ''The Book of the War'' (or, rather, an ''ex''clusion debate; there are [[Thread:133189|precedents]], you might recall), but I don't see how the situation is anywhere near one-sided enough for you to demand it be invalidated right there and then based on your own personal research and judgement. --[[User:Scrooge MacDuck|Scrooge MacDuck]] [[User talk:Scrooge MacDuck|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 11:41, January 19, 2020 (UTC) | ||
== Message from a Faction Paradox fan == | |||
I’m probably gonna get blocked by his majesty for this but honestly he’s acting like a tin pot dictator. Probably because being the admin of a Doctor Who wiki is the most power he’s ever going to get, AND HE KNOWS IT, so he desperately clings onto it with both hands in some pitiable attempt to make his life feel worthwhile. You can block for this, Amorkuz (just please don’t doxx me, I know you like doing that), but you know I’m right. [[Special:Contributions/82.132.236.138|82.132.236.138]]<sup>[[User talk:82.132.236.138#top|talk to me]]</sup> 19:04, January 19, 2020 (UTC) | |||
: The message above is a good match to the quote that Faction Paradox has always intended to destroy Doctor Who from Faction Paradox writers. This is the face of Faction Paradox fans they would not like this wiki to see. I think, it is more honest to keep it here. I would ask other admin not to remove it. [[User:Amorkuz|Amorkuz]] [[User talk:Amorkuz#top|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 17:24, January 20, 2020 (UTC) | |||
:: Out of curiosity, why do you think [[Special:Contributions/82.132.236.138|82.132.236.138]] is a Faction Paradox fan? – [[User:NateBumber|<span title="User:NateBumber">N8</span>]] ([[User_talk:NateBumber|<span title="Leave me a note">☎</span>]]/[[Special:Contributions/NateBumber|<span title="Spy on my edits">👁️</span>]]) 19:16, January 20, 2020 (UTC) | |||
::: And the above message from [[User:NateBumber|NateBumber]] is a perfect example why assuming he is acting in good faith is foolish in the face of the facts. He did not object to the description, from his FP colleague, of him and other FP writers as intending to destroy ''Doctor Who''. He would stay mum on his violations of the wiki policies presented on ''his'' talk page. (I even gave him several extra hours in case he remembers to do the right thing.) But in a matter that does not concern him in the slightest, a personal attack of an IP on an admin of the wiki, posted on the talk page of the admin and not mentioning NateBumber in any way, he would be the first defender... of Faction Paradox. As I mentioned on his talk page and as this intervention of his aptly demonstrates, violations of the wiki policies, by himself or others, are not generally his concern. He is here to represent and promote Faction Paradox. Here's hoping he will soon get a third FP story published. | |||
::: PS And I hope he would spare us all the belated assurances that, of course, he is condemning any personal attacks, be it against him or any other editor. When true but negative things are stated about his person, he loudly objects. When other FP associated people (like James Wylder) are adversely affected, he's the first responder in all his blazing glory. When, however, an admin inconvenient for the FP cause is attacked, then I guess a personal attack becomes par for the course. [[User:Amorkuz|Amorkuz]] [[User talk:Amorkuz#top|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 08:04, January 21, 2020 (UTC) | |||
:::: Amorkuz, I asked you six specific questions in [[User talk:Amorkuz#Requested Clarifications and Q&A]]. It took you seven days to reply. You made several edits in that time, including replies to talk page messages posted later than mine. I did not harass you with reminders or draw conclusions about your silence, but instead patiently waited for your reply. [[User talk:NateBumber/Archive 2#Talk page messages|This is a standard which you yourself have held me to before.]] Now I see that you, an admin, are free to hold yourself to a different standard. You couldn't even give me three days in return before concluding that I "did not object" and am choosing to "stay mum". | |||
In fact, I never intended to "stay mum". ''Despite'' my busy schedule, and ''despite'' the fact that you totally ignored the six questions I asked, I endeavored to respectfully address your main points, even if briefly. How, you ask, did Nate Bumber become involved in such "a matter that does not concern him in the slightest"? It was actually in the process of outlining [[Special:Diff/2836453|my reply to you]] that I looked at your talk page and noticed a few things: | |||
#[[User:Scrooge MacDuck]]'s above message, which I mentioned in mine. | |||
#The anonymous personal attack, which I was happy to see that [[User:Shambala108]] acted upon by swiftly reverting the vandalism and banning the user. Despite your remarks about "belated assurances", I care ''very much'' about [[T:NPA]] with regards to me, you, and ''all'' other users. Hence why I take such time and care with my replies, and hence why [[User:NateBumber|my user page]] offers a retraction of any accidental personal attack! But it was you who went out of your way to undermine the normal procedure, a move which you acknowledged as non-standard. | |||
#And lastly, your allegations about "the face of Faction Paradox fans". Of course I replied to this. As a Faction Paradox fan who ''does not'' "intend to destroy Doctor Who", why wouldn't I? Especially since -- speaking of user pages! -- yours tells me, | |||
{{quote|Welcome to my page. No, seriously. You are welcome here. Please do not hesitate to ask for assistance (on the talk page). If I'm busy, I'll just get back to you later. Your request is not a bother. I'm here to help and I'm happy to help.|[[User:Amorkuz]]|User:Amorkuz}} | |||
I suppose I've discovered the limit of that invitation. | |||
=== A thought experiment === | |||
If I posted a link to a news article about a cannibal and said, "This is the face of Doctor Who fans that they would not like this wiki to see," I would expect some replies: "Why do you think this cannibal is a Doctor Who fan?" "Even if they are, why are you generalizing to all of us?" "Isn't this a violation of [[T:NPA]]?" | |||
I suppose I might reply to them in the third person: "I notice that these users are acknowledging my post, but none have explicitly denied that they eat babies. They have confirmed my theory and, by flocking to a post that doesn't concern them, exposed themselves as only being here to represent and promote Doctor Who!" | |||
The main problem with this hypothetical is that I would never ever suggest in any way that Doctor Who fans are cannibals. First, because it would be obviously slanderous. And second, because -- believe it or not -- I'm a Doctor Who fan myself! | |||
=== Destroying Doctor Who === | |||
You keep excerpting from an interview with [[Jacob Black]] to suggest that Faction Paradox authors want to "destroy Doctor Who". I didn't understand your purpose from your message on my talk page, but now I think it's becoming a little clearer. For the record, here's the full context of those quotes: | |||
{{quote|The Faction Paradox universe is all about breaking the familiar and the loved, the things we’re nostalgic over. We can argue and debate all day about how connected/disconnected FP should be/shouldn’t be from Doctor Who, but FP was always about breaking Doctor Who. Taking the comfy aspects and tropes and characters and just destroying them. Running them through meat grinders, tortuous paths through shadowed valleys. | |||
Faction Paradox [[Alien Bodies (novel)|killed the Doctor.]] Faction Paradox [[The Taking of Planet 5 (novel)|turned dusty Gallifrey into a War-churning Homeworld of eldritch horrors.]] Faction Paradox [[Alien Bodies (novel)|redefined TARDIS into terrifying timeships of infinite complexity]] and [[The Shadows of Avalon (novel)|hidden masterplans.]] | |||
It breaks, rebuilds, and redefines the things we love. The familiar becomes unfamiliar and terrifying, and I really wanted to dive into that. | |||
I’m adamant that Doctor Who and Faction Paradox have had some of the greatest writers ever, and would be unfair and wrong to forget the influence the that [[Kate Orman]], [[Jon Blum]], [[Lance Parkin]], [[Lawrence Miles]], [[Lloyd Rose]], [[Philip Purser-Hallard]], and [[Daniel O'Mahony]] have had on my writing and this story in particular. | |||
(But I also wanted to write a story where the FP mythos wasn’t afraid to laugh at itself a bit.)|[[Jacob Black]]|[[https://obversebooks.co.uk/the-creators/]]}} | |||
You'll note that, for convenience's sake, I added some links so you can see which books Black is referencing when he lists the ways that Faction Paradox has historically broken Doctor Who. Could it be that all his figurative imagery about "breaking, rebuilding, and redefining" Doctor Who wasn't about the franchise but rather the two series' shared universe, in reference to the common storytelling technique of [https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/Deconstruction deconstruction]? | |||
=== Please stop === | |||
This is now the second time in a row that I have asked you something in good faith and you have answered me by ignoring my questions and instead impugning my motives. I'll take a page from your book and ask: Is there a reason you haven't answered the above question, instead choosing to attack me for even asking? You claim that my one-sentence comment belies my attitudes toward [[T:NPA]] by not disavowing vandalism, but really I was just trying to make the question as clear and as simple for you as possible. I see that still wasn't enough to get you to answer it. | |||
When you broke [[w:Terms of Use|FANDOM Terms of Use]] in [[Thread:255536]], staff was lenient because it was part of a good-faith search for conflicts of interest. I think you have left that territory. Your recent posts instead comprise a witch hunt based on conspiracy theory and conjecture. Rather than treating your fellow editors as good-faith contributors, you have concocted speculatory narratives so you can hurl baseless accusations: the debunked allegation of [[User:Revanvolatrelundar]]'s maliciously concealed involvement with Arcbeatle Press; the debunked allegation of my involvement in a "Credit for Edit" scheme with Obverse Books; the suggestion that [[Special:Contributions/82.132.236.138|82.132.236.138]] is a Faction Paradox fan and somehow represents all Faction Paradox fans, which still lacks any evidence. At the same time, you have repeatedly ignored and mocked my honest requests for evidence and offers of counterarguments. This has amounted to a sustained, targeted, and unjustified personal attack on my character (and, I believe, the characters of other users as well). | |||
I'm not asking you to stop caring about conflicts of interest, if that's all you think you're doing. I'm asking you to stop treating it like a witch hunt and start making conversations, not accusations. You started treating Revan and I as hostile witnesses when you thought you'd found evidence that he lied about his conflicts of interest, but he explained why you were mistaken, so now you can stop. Unless your goal is to just drive us from the wiki, in which case you're already more than halfway there. | |||
I see now that I was mistaken to leave you that friendly note on the 9th. When you [[User talk:NateBumber/Archive 2#Bias|originally informed me]] that you wished to "cease any appearance of friendship", I was perhaps naïve not to realize it meant the beginning of an unfriendship. I've wasted enough of my time on this; pending a significant change in tone, this will be my last personal reply to you. Thanks for reading – [[User:NateBumber|<span title="User:NateBumber">N8</span>]] ([[User_talk:NateBumber|<span title="Leave me a note">☎</span>]]/[[Special:Contributions/NateBumber|<span title="Spy on my edits">👁️</span>]]) 19:29, January 21, 2020 (UTC) | |||
== Goodbye == | |||
Goodbye [[Special:Contributions/86.164.12.255|86.164.12.255]]<sup>[[User talk:86.164.12.255#top|talk to me]]</sup> 01:21, January 26, 2020 (UTC) | |||
For what it's worth, Amorkuz, I agree with your proposal on how to maintain impartiality on this wiki. I actually don't think [[User:Tangerineduel|Tangerineduel]] or [[User:OncomingStorm12th|OncomingStorm12th]] himself disagree, though let me make it clear I am not speaking for them; from their comments I inferred they agree with the measure in general, but thought that a specific admin nomination was not the time or place to bring it up, and that it may need to be clarified. | |||
I hope you won't leave the wiki, and know you were a helpful admin to me. When I was new to the wiki (and I kind of still am compared to other users), you helped clear up how it works, especially in [[Thread:213311]] and the pages that followed its decision. If you do decide to leave, I wish you good luck. [[User:Chubby Potato|Chubby Potato]] [[User talk:Chubby Potato|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 20:45, January 26, 2020 (UTC) | |||
==Resignation of admin rights== | |||
I wanted to give some time for everything to cool and settle on the user rights discussion, and to give you the option to rescind your request to have your adminship removed. As others have stated above I meant no slight against you personally my concerns in the admin nomination were for a fair nomination process. If you don't reply countering your request to remove your admin rights within the end of this week I will take that as affirmation that you still wish to have your admin rights removed. --[[User:Tangerineduel|Tangerineduel]] / '''[[User talk:Tangerineduel|talk]]''' 14:52, January 31, 2020 (UTC) | |||
:As requested I have removed your admin rights. --[[User:Tangerineduel|Tangerineduel]] / '''[[User talk:Tangerineduel|talk]]''' 14:59, February 3, 2020 (UTC) |